Democrats: what should be done now?

[Spexvet]

Now that the Dems can actually initiate legislation, and can gather information, what should they do with this power, limited though it is?

[Grubendol]

Nancy Pelosi has Plans:

Democrats promise radical reform

By Holly Yeager in Washington
Published: November 8 2006 18:24 | Last updated: November 8 2006 18:24

Democrats in the House of Representatives on Wednesday declared themselves ready to press forward with an ambitious agenda and promised to enact the kind of change that they said voters demanded on Tuesday.
But they also tried to deflect attention from the liberal records of those set to ascend to top jobs in Congress, vowing to work with Republicans.
“We extend a hand of co-operation to the president, our colleagues across the aisle,” said Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago Democrat who led the party’s campaign committee. “We’ll work with you when we agree, we will challenge you when we don’t. But our goal will always be the best interests of our country.”
Uncertainty over which party would control the Senate – and the possibility that President George W. Bush could use his veto – necessitated such an approach. But so too did the growing strength of moderate Democrats, who expect to hold considerable sway in the new House.
“We will be the group that gave the Democrats the majority,” said John Tanner, a Tennessee congressman who is among the leaders of the Blue Dog coalition, a group of moderate Democrats who stress fiscal responsibility and often come from socially conservative districts.
Public expectations are also likely to shape the Democrats’ agenda. “This Democratic majority has heard the voices of the American people,” Nancy Pelosi, who will become the first female speaker of the House, said on Wednesday, with Iraq the place where the demand for change is most clear. Despite pleas from some on the left of their party, Democrats have ruled out impeachment proceedings against Mr Bush for his conduct of the war. They have also vowed not to cut off funding for US troops in Iraq.
A CBS News/New York Times poll this week found that 41 per cent of voters – and 50 per cent of Democrats – said that the war in Iraq would be the Democrats’ top priority if they controlled Congress. While Democrats portrayed the election as a referendum on Mr Bush and the war in Iraq, the difficult situation on the ground and divided views about what to do there, as well as the need to avoid appearing weak on national security and the White House’s power in this area will make quick, tangible progress difficult to achieve.
Mrs Pelosi has focused immediate attention on an aggressive package of measures that she said Democrats would enact in their first 100 hours in the majority.
Prompted by a series of recent ethics scandals, the top item in that “Six in ’06” platform is a set of rules changes, which Mrs Pelosi said would “make this the most honest and open Congress in history”. After Democrat complaints that Republican leaders frequently excluded them from debate and other House functions, she also pledged to restore civility and give the minority party a broader role.
The early agenda also includes increasing the federal minimum wage, enacting the homeland security recommendations of the bipartisan 9/11 commission, promoting stem-cell research and reducing university costs, by making tuition tax deductible and halving interest rates on student loans. Other priorities include giving the government the power to negotiate with drugs companies to lower prices in the Medicare prescription drug programme, eliminating what they say are Republican-backed in-centives to shift jobs overseas and rolling back subsidies for big oil companies, using those funds to promote alternative energy sources instead.
“Jobs, healthcare, education, energy independence, a safer America, a dignified retirement – that’s what the Democrats are all about and we’re going to do that in the first 100 hours,” Mrs Pelosi said on the campaign trail.
Democrats also pledged to adopt so-called “pay-go” rules, which re-quire any new spending or tax cuts to be offset by changes elsewhere in the budget.
Such a move would be popular with the Blue Dogs, who take their name from the Southern description of a party loyalist – one who would vote for a yellow dog if it were on the ballot, as long as it was running as a Democrat. The Blue Dogs were moderate and conservative Democrats who claim to have been “choked blue” by their party in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when liberals were in control.
“It helps force choices,” said Mr Tanner.
Tuesday’s vote saw the number of Blue Dogs in the House increase from 37 to 44, including several in the Ohio River Valley. Their new ranks include some lawmakers who are likely to become quick celebrities in the capital, such as Heath Shuler, a former Washington Redskins professional football quarterback. Mr Shuler, elected in North Carolina, opposes abortion and gun control.
Mr Tanner said Blue Dogs would also push for a financial audit of all government agencies and for including the costs of the war in Iraq within the federal budget, rather than treating it as a supplemental cost that is not included with other budget calculations.
Mrs Pelosi has earned a reputation as a San Francisco liberal and several Democrats poised to take over as chairmen of key committees have long records on the left of their party.
But James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University in Washington, said a Democratic majority would not be able to base its work on strictly liberal policies. “Elections have mandates, and the number of moderates elected means they’ll have to go to the middle.”

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006

[chip anderson]

1) Withdraw from war, make inner U.S. and territories safe.
2) Turn fiscal conservative.
3) Become total isolationist.
4) Forbid import of anything that can be made or found in the U.S.

:cheers:

[hotsauce]

1) Withdraw from war, make inner U.S. and territories safe.
2) Turn fiscal conservative.
3) Become total isolationist.
4) Forbid import of anything that can be made or found in the U.S.

:cheers:

1. Totally.
2. I don't know if you've noticed, but by comparison to the historically profligate Republican party of the past 6 years, today's Dems are quite fiscally conservative. I know your meaning of "fiscal conservative" is closer to "end welfare and privatize Social Security" than mine, which is along the lines of "don't spend a half trillion more dollars than you take in every year", but there's room there to work.
3. That's not really realistic, but stopping meddling in the affairs of other countries purely for our gain and the other country's detriment would be a good start.
4. Also not very realistic, but it would be a good idea to grant tax credits (or other incentives along those lines) to businesses that keep their manufacturing in this country as opposed to shipping jobs to whatever nation is giving the best deal on slave labor this week. Something is seriously, seriously awry if it's cheaper to make goods on the other side of the planet and ship them here than to give a job to an American citizen, where all that money will remain in the economy here.

[Bill West]

1) Withdraw from war, make inner U.S. and territories safe.
2) Turn fiscal conservative.
3) Become total isolationist.
4) Forbid import of anything that can be made or found in the U.S.

:cheers:

Long overdue.

[Spexvet]

1) Withdraw from war, make inner U.S. and territories safe.
2) Turn fiscal conservative.
3) Become total isolationist.
4) Forbid import of anything that can be made or found in the U.S.

:cheers:

These are all things that could have been done by the repubicans long ago. Why didn't they do it?

I think the Democrats should use their majority to:

1. Find out what really went on with pre-war intelligence, post-war planning, and reconstruction contracts.
2. Initiate a plan to end Iraq that is more than "stay the course" and "we lose if we leave too soon".
3. Reform lobbying, campaign finance, campaigning itself, and make the ethics committee and ethics rules the way they were before the repubicans made them corrupt-repubican-friendly.
4. Repeal the tax cut to the rich.
5. Repeal corporate welfare.
6. Make our ountry self-sufficient.
7. Make our country more secure.
8. reduce the deficit.

[Grubendol]

reintroduce tariffs and pull us out of NAFTA/GATT and the WTO.

[coda]

1. 10 to 20 B$ on 'alternative' energy research and development (nuclear, PV, local fossil fuels, wind, efficiency, geothermal, etc.), a Manhattan type project for energy
2. Further campaign finance reform
3. Aid the president in developing a new Iraq strategy
4. Tax code overhaul
5. Medicare overhaul

[Grubendol]

Medicare for all....a single payer healthcare system like in Germany.

Coda, you write like you listen to Thom Hartmann

[coda]

Medicare for all....a single payer healthcare system like in Germany.

Coda, you write like you listen to Thom Hartmann

I don't like single payer systems, I don't think they work well and neither do most of the countries that have implemented them. That said, I don't think our current system is working very well either. I don't have an answer but maybe number five on my list should be "Devise a path to health care for all Americans".

I've never listened to Thom Hartmann, I'm not much of a talk radio guy and when I am I generally listen to people I don't agree with, helps me prepare for the crazy pablum the fringes try to feed us as rational thought. Maybe I'll give him a try though.

[For-Life]

I don't like single payer systems, I don't think they work well and neither do most of the countries that have implemented them. That said, I don't think our current system is working very well either. I don't have an answer but maybe number five on my list should be "Devise a path to health care for all Americans".

I've never listened to Thom Hartmann, I'm not much of a talk radio guy and when I am I generally listen to people I don't agree with, helps me prepare for the crazy pablum the fringes try to feed us as rational thought. Maybe I'll give him a try though.

We have it in Canada. We have had some troubles, but so has the American system. I still think the overall system is better. We have also seen the problem that private health has put on private business (since it is the business who pays for it instead of the individuals).

I do believe in capitalism, but for capitalism to work to its fullest then individuals showed not be blocked out of educational and health opportunities, due to economic barriers.

[Grubendol]

One of his main talking points using the exact phrasing you just did....mainly a "Manhattan Project" for energy.

Single payer healthcare operates at about 3-5% overhead, private for profit operates at 20-30% overhead. Doctors and hospitals are still private and you can go to whoever you want. The government is the insurance company. Not socialized medicine (where the docs and hospitals are employees of the govt)

[Steve Machol]

One thing (among many) that I hope for is that Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi takes her role as Speaker of the House of Representatives seriously and will separate her political leanings and party functions from adminstering the House fairly and without partisanship.

Speaker Hastert's rule of not allowing any Democratic legislation to reach the floor of the House for a vote unless it also had the backing of a majority of Republicans was odious and a serious abuse of power. I hope that Speaker Pelosi rejects such overt partisanship and recognizes then all the people's Representatives deserve a voice in proposing and voting on legislation important to their constituents.

[Grubendol]

Well before entering politics Pelosi's previous experience was being a stay at home mother of five. She knows how to deal with in-fighting ;)

[chip anderson]

What the woman is good at is yelling and screaming. She sounds like a mad Mexican Fish-Wife. The loudest voice is seldom the wisest.

[Grubendol]

Like Rush, O'Reilley, Delay, Hastert, etc. etc.

[For-Life]

So you guys make your decisions based on gender?

I will tell you this right now, never vote for someone because she is a woman, never vote against someone because she is a woman.

I prefer to vote based on issues, trust, responsibility and such.

[coda]

What the woman is good at is yelling and screaming. She sounds like a mad Mexican Fish-Wife. The loudest voice is seldom the wisest.

As gracious in defeat as in victory ;)

[Grubendol]

So you guys make your decisions based on gender?

I will tell you this right now, never vote for someone because she is a woman, never vote against someone because she is a woman.

I prefer to vote based on issues, trust, responsibility and such.

How in the world did you get that from what I said?

[For-Life]

I didn't. Someone edited a post (not you).

[Pete Hanlin]

1. Make the tax cuts permanent...
2. Make the tax cuts permanent...
3. Make the tax cuts permanent...

By doing any of the above, the Democrats would have the opportunity to forever shed the (historically deserved) label of being the "tax & spend" party.

Other than the premonitional pain in my wallet, I don't really see the Dems doing much of anything (except launching a ton of investigations- which both parties seem to enjoy when the other holds the White House). The GOP certainly didn't accomplish much with the Exec and Leg branches, so I doubt the next two years will see much more than gridlock.

Hopefully, history will not be repeated and the admin will work with the new majority party to take care of some issues faced by our country (including the war).

PS- Since the Republicans elected Lieberman, wouldn't it be a hoot if he went ahead and changed affiliation (just a funny thought- I wouldn't expect it to happen)?
:)

[aaron]

The only hope i really have is related to taxes. They need to obliterate the Alternative Minimum Tax. It is supposed to be a way of insuring that people in wealthy tax brackets don't itemize themselves out of paying any taxes. It forces a "minimum tax". The only problem is that when it was inacted the numbers don't change each year adjusted for inflation, so MILLIONS of middle class families pay this tax. And more and more each year. Oh and by the way, most of the dedutions that make a signifficant differance in your taxes, cannot be taken. i don't make alot of money but since my wife and I both work, don't own a home, and live in an expensive area relatively (Southern CA), we are abused by the gov. Does anyone else know about this?

Down with AMT!!!

aaron

[Spexvet]

1. Make the tax cuts permanent...
2. Make the tax cuts permanent...
3. Make the tax cuts permanent...

...:)

1. For the middle class
2. For the middle class
3. For the middle class

In fact, cut taxes even more for the middle class, and raise them for the wealthy, they can certainly afford it. Last week I heard a report about the shortage of 100-plus foot yachts, and a report about people living in their car because they have a job but can't afford an apartment.

The biggest problem in the US is the disparity between rich and middle class.

[Grubendol]

Spexvet, you said it. That was JFK's plan and it worked well.

[aaron]

Spexvet, you said it. That was JFK's plan and it worked well.

Up until he was assasinated for it. The gap in the US between these two groups is growing at an alarming rate. And as a young man trying to start a family it is difficult to see happening around me. I seem to be pulled both ways. Stuck in the middle is the worst place to be right now.

Look at the cnn report on Brazil this week. Now THAT is seperation of the rich and poor. And Brazil is the economic powerhouse (completely energy independant) of south america.

Down with the AMT!!!

ad